• Skip to main content

CentreForMedicalHumanities.org

  • Home
  • Telehealth Analysis
  • Research Translations
  • Evidence Reviews
  • Blog
  • About

Maudsley Debate: “Enabled? Or Labelled”—Psychiatric Diagnosis on the occasion of the publication of DSM5 (Public event, London, Institute of Psychiatry, 5 June 2013)

posted on February 25, 2025

Event Summary: 48th Maudsley Debate on Psychiatric Diagnosis

Event Type: Public academic debate on psychiatric diagnosis and DSM-5
Date & Time: Wednesday, 5 June 2013, 6pm (refreshments from 5:30pm)
Location: Wolfson Lecture Theatre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, Denmark Hill
Motion: “This House believes that psychiatric diagnosis has advanced the care of people with mental health problems”
For the Motion: Prof Norman Sartorius (former WPA president), Prof Anthony David (Cognitive Neuropsychiatry)
Against the Motion: Dr Felicity Callard (Medical Humanities), Dr Pat Bracken (Post-Psychiatry)
Chair: Sir Simon Wessely, Professor of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry
Central Issue: Whether standardised psychiatric classification systems advance patient care or merely stigmatise through labelling
Context: Coincides with publication of DSM-5 and international DSM-5 conference

Felicity Callard, of the Centre for Medical Humanities, will be one of the guest speakers in the 48th Maudsley Debate – which is open to all, and hosted by the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London. The debate coincides with the publication of the 5th edition of the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM5), as well as an international conference on DSM5, at which Felicity Callard is also one of the invited speakers.

48th Maudsley Debate: Enabled? Or Labelled?

This House believes that psychiatric diagnosis has advanced the care of people with mental health problems.

Wednesday 5th June, 6pm (refreshments served from 5.30pm)

To coincide with the publication of the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), sometimes described as the “Bible” of American psychiatry, the Institute of Psychiatry is hosting a debate on the issue of psychiatric diagnosis. Some argue that a rigorously standardised system of classification of mental disorders forms an essential role in conceptualising a patient’s problem, in predicting what treatments are likely to be effective, and in conducting valid scientific research. Others consider psychiatric diagnoses to be no more than labels, which lack scientific and predictive validity and serve only to stigmatise and objectify those who suffer from mental disorders. These issues will be debated in the 48th Maudsley Debate on Wednesday 5 June at 6pm at the Wolfson Lecture Theatre, Institute of Psychiatry, Denmark Hill. The motion is “This House believes that psychiatric diagnosis has advanced the care of people with mental health problems.”

Speaking for the motion

Prof Norman Sartorius, former president of the World Psychiatric Association

Prof Anthony David, Professor of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry

Speaking against the motion:

Dr Felicity Callard, Senior Lecturer in Social Science for Medical Humanities, Durham University

Dr Pat Bracken, Clinical Director of Mental Health in West Cork and author of “Post- Psychiatry: Mental Health in a Post-Modern World”.

Chair: Sir Simon Wessely, Professor of Psychological Medicine and Vice Dean for Academic Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry

Wolfson Lecture Theatre, Institute of Psychiatry Main Building, De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF

For more information, click here.

Related Articles

  • Nootropic Supplement Safety Guide 2026: Who Should Be Cautio…
  • Nootropic Ingredients Research 2026: What Studies Actually S…
  • How Cognitive Function Changes With Age: 2026 Overview
  • Empathy and memory in theology and literature! (Affiliates’…

Filed Under: Conferences

CentreForMedicalHumanities.org is an independent health evidence publication. This site is not a medical practice, healthcare provider, academic institution, or research organization. Nothing on this site constitutes medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare provider before making decisions about supplements, medications, or health interventions. This website is not affiliated with Durham University, the Institute for Medical Humanities, or any academic or medical institution. The domain name reflects previous ownership history and does not indicate institutional affiliation, academic authority, or endorsement. The Durham Institute for Medical Humanities is an active research institute at Durham University — visit their official page for information about their programs and research. Some content on this site contains affiliate links. Purchases made through these links may generate a commission for this publication at no cost to the reader. See our Evidence Standards page for full disclosure details. Content produced by the CMH Evidence Review editorial team. © 2026 CentreForMedicalHumanities.org. All rights reserved. | About | Our Evidence Standards | Non-Affiliation Notice | Privacy Policy